Okay, I just watched Redbelt, and this thred ISN'T about sports, but rather actors who seem to choose the right movie every time. Redbelt got me thinking about Chiwetel Ejiofor, and how I have YET to see him in a movie that hasn't impressed me (except for American Gangster from which I don't even remember him). The guy has done some awesome work and I can't really think of something I have seen him in where he didn't own the screen.

So this thread is dedicated to actors/actresses who somehow manage to keep a clean record. Are there any out there? Name the actors that you think have a spotless record when it comes to film, and if you think the suggestions don't, then let's debate it like civilized men. I supposed directors and producers can be included in this hot mess. Let the arguing begin!

For a director Edward Yang tops my list for having a spotless record. While not everyone of his films is as brilliant as Yi Yi or A Brighter Summer Day they are all are incredibly well made and worthy of praise.

Johnny Depp? I mean, his movies haven't all been great, but he's generally been great in all of his movies. The only performance of his I didn't really groove to was in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, but even that wasn't horrible or phoned in.

RogueScribner wrote:Johnny Depp? I mean, his movies haven't all been great, but he's generally been great in all of his movies. The only performance of his I didn't really groove to was in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, but even that wasn't horrible or phoned in.

Speaking of his performance, I agree. I like Depp whenever I see him. But not necessarily his movies as a whole. I hated Charlie in the Chocolate Factory, but not because of Depp's performance.

So are we basing this just on performance, or sort of a mixture of performance and film performance, because that's what I was thinking. It's a little less opinionated, I think, and more concrete if we include the film quality as well. Shit or Gold seems to be more recognizable on a larger scale.

Nachokoolaid wrote:So are we basing this just on performance, or sort of a mixture of performance and film performance, because that's what I was thinking. It's a little less opinionated, I think, and more concrete if we include the film quality as well. Shit or Gold seems to be more recognizable on a larger scale.

I could care less about anyone's methodology. I think someone can be awesome in a shit film, and it doesn't tarnish my image of them. A lot of you know I am a big Matt Damon fan, and looking back on his career, there's really only one film with a blot-worthy performance from him (can't remember the name but it was another shitty Kevin Smith film with Angels and fart jokes). So I don't see why people can't just look at actors, directors, writers, producers, et al... example their career as a whole, and then suggest people they think have been a benchmark in cinema quality.

I am tired of threads where it's all like "yeah let's talk about best performances in slasher films where someone gets raped by a ghost but the movie has to have had a wide release and made more than 30 million at the domestic box office".

I would agree with Gary Oldman, but I've not seen all of his work so I guess there may be a few clangers in there.

Some other potentials for the list (obviously feel free to strike them from the record):Peter SellersMorgan Freeman (although he technically been playing the same role for twenty years)John MalkovichWes AndersonKevin SpaceyPeter OstrumMichael PalinPatrick Stewart (I know some of the Star Trek's are too great, but he still usually maintained a certain standard in them)Ian McKellenJohn Le Mesurier

There's a difference between a gamble that missed and a plain shitty movie.

I think Cate Blanchett has done great acting in every movie I've seen her in, and even though some of the movies she's in don't turn out so well, I can understand why she signed on to do them.

But guys like Michael Caine, Sam Jackson, Morgan Freeman have all signed on to play one dimensional characters in things that must've looked like shitfest even back when they were just treatments. I realize all those guys have undeniable charisma and acting ability, but I also feel they have a default performance that they resort to time after time when there isn't much to the character they're playing or they're not getting adequate direction. If you don't tell Sam Jackson to do something else, he'll just go into Tarantino mode and collect his cheque. So I can't call these guys spotless even though I really like them.